Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.
Environment committee Certainly as we look at it in the context of the clean fuels standard in particular in terms of the work we've done with Environment and Climate Change Canada and identifying compliance pathways, continuous improvements in reducing energy consumption and improving energy efficiency in refineries will ultimately reduce the carbon intensity of the fuel we produce.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee That's what's called a competitive market.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee That's a segment of the industry that I can't comment directly on—it's not the segment I represent—but certainly, weather events have impacts. Whether you can attribute any individual weather event to climate change is a different question.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee I think carbon pricing, if properly designed, offers a policy solution that addresses a number of the principles that we see should be embedded in policy. Certainly, it provides some level of transparency. A carbon price with some predictability about how that price is going to change over time provides some clarity and predictability as well.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee Ninety-five per cent.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee In fact, the whole concept of an output-based pricing system is something that we support. An output-based pricing system that sets a benchmark that everyone must achieve rather than an amount that everyone has to come down is, in our view, a smart policy design. The issue for us is where the benchmark is set and what the feasibility of achieving that benchmark is and what perverse outcomes it might drive with respect to what the objectives of the policy are.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee Actually, I would clarify. I think that in the government's own analysis they came to the conclusion that 80% was a more appropriate benchmark. Subsequent to that they asked us...or gave us and all the industries the opportunity to provide further analysis specific to our own sectors as to the appropriateness of the 80% new benchmark.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee I don't have that here. I'll defer to Monsieur Montreuil of our staff, who has led this effort. It's an extensive deck of which we've extracted two charts here.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee Our issue is that the level it is set at in terms of the expectations will actually allow very little behavioural change. With regard to many of the Canadian refineries, because the gap will be so large, the only option they will have to comply will be to pay the tax on excess emissions.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee The degree to which behaviour will be modified or investments will be made in emission reduction technology when it reaches that level is severely constrained. The only option will be to pay the amount.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee It is compliance. Ultimately it's a regulation under CEPA and CEPA comes with the hammer of the Criminal Code. Potentially you go to jail, so there is a real compliance issue.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee It's a requirement.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag
Environment committee First of all, let me just say that, in many of the countries, there are refiners we compete with in our markets in other jurisdictions—and the U.S. is the best example—who don't face those carbon costs. That is a huge competitive disadvantage for Canadian refineries, the additional costs they will pay through this carbon pricing system where they're trade exposed.
January 30th, 2019Committee meeting
Peter Boag